Sunday, February 04, 2007

Why There’s No Such Thing as a Fundamentalist Atheist

 Via The One With Aldacron

I said above that the term “atheist fundamentalist” is an oxymoron. Fundamentalism arises from faith. Atheists have no faith. So there is no such thing as an atheist fundamentalist. There are some militant atheists out there who love to provoke confrontations with the religious. But I think they are rare. Hardline atheists are those who stand up for atheism and denounce religion for what it is.

A new Atheist blog (for me anyway), and a great post too.

(Posted while listing to Sublime - 54-46 -That's My Number - 40 oz. To Freedom.)

 

Technorati tags:

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I've always thought of "Militant" and "fundamentalist" as the same thing. Beside, as for fundamentalist being only for the religious,

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source
fun·da·men·tal·ism

3. strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles: the fundamentalism of the extreme conservatives.

I'd call anyone trying to do away with religion as a fundamentalist, of course as a thiest, I would be expected to be a tad bit biased.

Unknown said...

"Fundemantelist" has become a term to be used on everyone who are very concerned with something. No doubt, the reason for Theists to use it against Atheists is that they want to feel the joy of labelling too. But the way they use it is just a cheap way to try to escape the fact that real fundamentalists don't spend the time making blasphemous videos on Youtube but in fact kill abortion doctors and blow up trains for a holy cause.

However:
The term "Fundamentalist Atheist" can have a meaning, like this:

We already speak of "hard" and "soft" Atheists, but the fundament for Atheism is that there is no god. Not that there is no god like there is no pink unicorn.
But if the boundaries of Atheism gets blurred, then "NO belief in God" is its fundament.
In this respect, the hard Atheist will insist on Atheism in its purest form, while the softie will open for a certain doubt, albeit theoretical.

There are even some (but hopefully few) who sees Atheism as purely relating to gods - not, say, spirits and those damn pink unicorns. In fact, this last type could very well claim to be a fundamentalist Atheist because Atheism as a word do not technically have anything to do with spirits or pink unicorns. It is not Aspirituality or Apinkunicornism. But I sure hope that this is only a theoretical problem.
(I do happen to know of a selfproclaimed Atheist who mocked Christians, but believed in Von Däniken theories...)

Well, having said all this, I think (as was the point with the blog post) that the term "Fundamentalist Atheist" as it is used by religious people is completely absurd. However, it can have a meaning as a "back to basics" form of Atheism.

Aldacron said...

@matthew: I wish I had seen this sooner.

You are overlooking one very important fact about atheism: there is no doctrine. To be a Christian, one must believe in God and follow the teachings of the Bible. There are "loose" interpretations of the Bible and "strict" interpretations. It is the latter that, as per your dictionary quote and my blog post, makes someone a fundamentalist.

Atheism is quite different. The only criteria one need satisfy to be labeled an atheist is to deny, or disbelieve, the existence of any supernatural being. That's it. There's nothing to be interpreted strictly nor loosely. You are either an atheist, or you aren't.

My desire to see the abolishment of religion has nothing to do with atheism. It is my personal opinion that religion does more harm than good and, by extension, my personal belief that it should be abolished. Some atheists (hardline) agree with me, some don't (soft). Some (militant) would go further and verbally, or physically, assault theists rather than rationally debate them. So when we use adjectives like "soft", "hardline" or "militant" to describe an atheist, we aren't describing the degree of their belief in, or interpretation of, the doctrine of atheism -- there is no such thing. We are instead describing the volatility of their personal beliefs.

So I still hold that there is no such thing as an atheist fundamentalist, since there is nothing about atheism to which one can strictly or loosely adhere. Someone who entertains the possibility that a supernatural being exists, but who does not follow any specific religion, is not an atheist. They may be labeled "agnostic", "freethinker", "naturalist", or any other label you like, but they are not atheists.